Can a Supper Summit resolve Brexit at last? U.K.’s Boris Johnson heads to Brussels.
By Karla Adam, Michael Birnbaum and William Booth,
Simon Dawson Bloomberg
LONDON — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson headed to Brussels on Wednesday evening for a dinner meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, a tête-à-têtet the British press dubbed his “date with destiny” and which could have big consequences for Britain’s exit from the European Union.
As Johnson journeyed to Brussels, some were fearful it could be a “Last Supper” before the hope of a post-Brexit trade and security deal dies — and the two sides realize they really can’t make the compromises required to forge a future relationship based on a bilateral pact.
There was much huffing and puffing in London and Brussels over the last-ditch mission, which comes just three weeks before Britain’s 11-month transition period expires at the end of the month.
The two sides want to secure a trade deal, but deep obstacles remain, including on fishing rights, state subsidies and ways to solve future disputes.
The dinner between the two leaders could reset the dynamics and unlock further discussions. Or it could help either side get an edge on the inevitable blame game that will ensue if the Britain ends up crashing out after four decades in world’s richest trading club.
Analysts and diplomats on both sides of the English Channel said it was hard to know what to make of the theatrics.
Tim Bale, a politics professor at Queen Mary, University of London, said, “there could be a degree of choreography in this, which would suit both sides. If they are going to get a deal, it’s best for both sides if it looks as if it was tough negotiating but they pulled off a miracle at the last minute.”
Bale cautioned, “By all accounts, they were quite a long way apart, even on most basic issues, even a few days ago.” He handicapped the possibility for an eventual deal at 50/50.
Both sides insist that an abrupt — and possibly chaotic — departure remains a real possibility.
The Supper Summit will pit the devil-may-care Johnson against a frugal and precise former German defense minister who started as head of the European Union’s executive branch a year ago.
The two leaders share some basic traits. Like Johnson, von der Leyen spent some of her formative years in Brussels as the child of a senior E.U. official. They went to the same Brussels high school for the children of European bureaucrats, though they did not overlap. Like Johnson, she is the parent of a large brood: seven children in her case, six or more — the precise number is uncertain — in his.
But Johnson likes to bluster his way past the facts, and von der Leyen likes to muster them. He likes to live large — big Italian red wines and weekends at Chequers, the prime minister’s official countryside estate. She arranged for a tiny apartment to be constructed inside the sprawling European Commission headquarters so she could skip the commute to work.
Her staid and diplomatic approach may offer less of a foil than her predecessor, Jean-Claude Juncker, to Johnson, who sometimes likes to turn his opponents into cartoons. Juncker, a nicotine-worn former prime minister of Luxembourg, often blurted out exactly what he was thinking and occasionally batted his political opponents about on the head.
Can the odd couple strike a bargain?
Johnson, who was in London in the early afternoon, told Parliament on Wednesday that “a good deal is there to be done” but insisted that the E.U. still needed yield.
“Our friends in the E.U. are currently insisting that if they pass a new law in the future with which we in this country don’t comply … they want the automatic right to punish us and to retaliate,” he said. “And secondly, they are saying that the U.K. should be the only country in the world not to have sovereign control over its fishing waters.”
These were not terms that “any prime minister of this country should accept,” he said.
Some of the differences are existential.
Britain wants to be able to “take back control” of its sovereignty — for many Brexiteers, that was the whole point of leaving the bloc.
But the E.U. doesn’t want someone on its doorstep undercutting the E.U. on issues such as state aid or environmental regulations to gain a competitive advantage. The E.U. is concerned that if it allows Britain relatively unfettered access to its markets without holding it to a set of common rules, or “level playing field,” other member states would want that arrangement, too.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel told lawmakers a deal was still possible, but not at any cost. She said the “issue of fair competition between two diverging legal systems — this is the actual big issue for which we need satisfying solutions,” according to The Guardian newspaper.
If a deal isn’t struck, Britain’s exit could be messy and costly. Its trading relationship with its biggest trading partner would default to World Trade Organization rules, meaning overnight tariffs and quotas that would hit both sides, clogging ports and supply chains.
The lead E.U. negotiator, Michel Barnier, and his team have been downbeat in recent days, warning E.U. ambassadors that they need to begin preparations for a British departure without a deal and telling them a bad agreement will be worse for Europe than none at all.
One diplomat involved in the negotiations guessed Wednesday that a deal, if it happens, would not be finalized until New Year’s Eve.
“The situation is still stuck,” the diplomat said. “Besides the casting, nothing has changed,” even with a nice three-course dinner.
The disagreements have touched on areas that have been sore points for years — in some cases centuries. Belgium’s Flemish fishermen have declared that they have eternal fishing rights in British waters because of a 1666 charter granted by King Charles II to the citizens of Bruges.
Flemish Economy Minister Hilde Crevits noted Monday that a London lawyer investigated the charter in 1851 and determined it was still in force.
“We believe the privilege to still be valid today,” Crevits said in a statement.
No matter how much wine is poured, the reality remains: European leaders, sensing themselves in the far stronger position against a medium-sized economic power that depends heavily on their market for its exports, see little to gain from compromises. And the downside of a deal with not enough strings attached, in the European view, is that Britain could eventually subvert E.U. regulations and flood the continent’s market with cheaper products that don’t meet E.U. rules.
How much time actually remains depends on the type of agreement that Britain and the E.U. reach. A stripped-down trade deal could be approved by leaders and the European Parliament alone, easing passage by Dec. 31. But if there is a more complicated bargain, some national parliaments would also have to ratify it, increasing the possibility of a misstep that leads to Britain dropping out of the European market on Dec. 31 without a safety net.
“As a runner, I can tell you it feels a bit like the last kilometer of a marathon,” German Europe Minister Michael Roth told reporters on Tuesday. “And yet the race is far from over. Some very critical issues will require our full energy and commitment the next few days.”
Birnbaum reported from Riga, Lativa. Quentin Ariès in Brussels contributed to this report.
